How Apple, Inc. went thermonuclear on Samsung, erasing Android's primary profit center

13468916

Comments

  • Reply 101 of 315
    Sorry, but this article is full of emotional claptrap and has very little substance.

    Just HOW did Apple "go thermonuclear" on Samsung? It looks far more to me like Apple stuck to its strategic view of how to run a profitable niche business concentrating on profits rather than market share which it has done from the beginning.

    As for Samsung's profits, who cares? They've chased every Apple rumour going since they lost the court case and launched loads of products that cost money to do and launched them into markets that did not exist, except in some rumour site's imaginations. Now they've got a bloody nose out of it. Serves them right too.
  • Reply 102 of 315
    dasanman69dasanman69 Posts: 13,002member
    sog35 wrote: »
    Size of a display is NOT innovation
    To be called an innovation, an idea must be replicable at an economical cost and must satisfy a specific need.

    The 'specific need' was a bigger screen which you constantly claimed was the reason for Samsung's sales.
  • Reply 103 of 315
    65c81665c816 Posts: 136member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by sog35 View Post

     

    Xiaomi is NOT a threat to Apple.  No way on earth a Chinese brand run by the communist party will be a hit in the western world.  Especially since the Communist party has access to all the data that runs through Xiaomi phones.  In China no one considers Xiaomi a luxury item.  Its like comparing a Toyota (Xiaomi) to a Mercedes Benz (Apple).


    Oh?  You know China and the Chinese market now?  My friends over in Asia are all talking about and buying Xiaomi phones.  No one is talking about Samsung phones any more.

     

    Why?  Because - again - mid tier prices for high end phones.  The biggest threat is not Samsung, but Xiaomi.  It is dumb not to recognize that.

  • Reply 104 of 315
    Just another ho-hum article that fails to mention the world changing CONCEPT of the Ubuntu phone. Whoever develops this concept first is going to be the next Apple. It's hard to believe that there is not a corporation out there that can grasp this. Apple is more than 80% there, the last remaining part is for iOS apps to run on their computers. If Apple started a division to sell economically priced computers and phones, they could own the world. Their failing is to maximize profits, not to sell good products making a reasonable profit. The question Americans cannot grasp is that if your net worth is already $100 million, what the hell is another $100 million going to do for you? Apple has over $150 billion in cash just sitting around. What the hell is another $50 billion going to do for them?

    There is no money out there outside the G-20 for both a smartphone and a computer. These folks are not interested in smaller and faster. They just want and need something they can afford that works. There is the potential out there for a billion sales of a workable ubuntu phone. As Americans, you have no idea, as it is literally impossible for you to walk into a retailer and test drive a computer with linux installed, in spite of the fact that every major manufacture sells computers outside the USA with linux installed. You just cannot find one on their USA website or in a USA store.

    I might also note that 16 of the top 20 laptops sold by amazon are priced at less than $350, with 3 of the other 4 from apple. Apple'so A7 chip was considered desktop class. The A8 is much improved. The cost of these processors is about $20. Intel's best efforts at a mobile processor sells for $280, their server processors more than a grand. Connect the dots.

    The day I can dock my smartphone into a laptop shell is the day I get rid of my Apple products. And so will a lot of schools and corporations.
  • Reply 105 of 315
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by sog35 View Post

     

    Use your brain.  


    ....says the master of posting first and thinking later.

     

    Thanks for the advice.<img class=" src="http://forums-files.appleinsider.com/images/smilies//lol.gif" /> 

     

    Add: Give me a cite for the "90%" claim, or please move along.... I'll wait.

  • Reply 106 of 315
    MacProMacPro Posts: 19,697member
    patpatpat wrote: »
    I see the larger 6 and 6 plus as a definite improvement. Samsung dominated the large form factor segment until now.

    Many at Apple have stated they had to wait for the right technologies to be available to be able to do a larger screen 'right'. They could have done one far sooner had they simply been reactive to ... what was that company that used to be in this business again... mmm.. Oh Samsung, I remember now. :D
  • Reply 107 of 315

    Samsung itself is the problem.  When you flood the market with products big and small, high end and low end, you are diluting your brand equity.

     

    At the end, Samung is just another OEM.

  • Reply 108 of 315
    cnocbuicnocbui Posts: 3,613member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by sog35 View Post

     

     

    Dude, many people held off buying ANY phone to buy the 6.

     

    Samsung itself said the problem was NOT unit sales but averaging selling price.  In other words they sold way less TOP END PHONES (phones which Xiaomi does not make).  It was estimated that Samsung sold 50% less top end phones while Apple sold almost 30% more TOP END PHONES.

     

    By doing simple math you can easily see that Samsung sold as many mid/low end phones as last year.  But the top end phones sales were horrible.

     

    LG/Xiaomi/Oppo/Sony sell a rounding error of top end phones compared to Apple.  It is Apple that is KILLING Samsung.




    Dude(sic)

     

    People holding off to buy the 6 was obvious from the iOS market share decline...  OKaaaaaay.

     

    It's 'fewer' top end phones, not 'less' - and Xiaomi certainly do make top end phones.  Compare the S5 with the Mi 4: http://www.gsmarena.com/compare.php3?idPhone1=6033&idPhone2=6518

     

    Lenovo, LG, Oppo, One +1, Huawei, Nexus and their ilk have taken sales from the S5.  I think I did mention once or twice that it was the lack of S5 sales that were the main part of Samsung's problem, so I don't know why you are pretending I didn't.  I think it has been suggested to you before that you read and try and comprehend what other people write.

     

    If Apple were the cause of Samsung's problems then the iOS market share should have increased, not declined.  The iP6 may well steal market share from Android high end phones, but it is too early to tell.  I doubt it will as the iPhone is, as always, far too expensive for the majority of people, which is probably the main reason Apple has a large market share in the US, but typically less than half that elsewhere.  Most people who live in the US simply do not appreciate how expensive iPhones are overseas and how high their price is in proportion to peoples incomes.

  • Reply 109 of 315
    diegogdiegog Posts: 135member
    Apple is bringing Samsung to its knees in terms of profitability, but it's Xiaomi that will deal the killing blow.

    Samsung lose all of its profitability in the high-end and have to try to resort back to the low-end, Xiaomi will kill them there.
    sog35 wrote: »
    Its not Xiaomi thats killing Samsung. Its Apple. Apple is stealing tens of millions of high end sales from Samsung.

    Samsung will sell about the same amount of phones in 2014 as in 2013. But they will be selling way less high end phones aka the only phones that make money.

    You are giving Xiaomi way too much credit. Xiaomi is a fruad company that is selling phones at cost and is being funded by the Communist Party.
  • Reply 110 of 315
    cnocbuicnocbui Posts: 3,613member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post





    Many at Apple have stated they had to wait for the right technologies to be available to be able to do a larger screen 'right'. They could have done one far sooner had they simply been reactive to ... what was that company that used to be in this business again... mmm.. Oh Samsung, I remember now. image

     

    So none of the big screens prior to the iP6 were good enough?

     

    <img class=" src="http://forums-files.appleinsider.com/images/smilies//lol.gif" />

  • Reply 111 of 315
    MacProMacPro Posts: 19,697member
    swissmac2 wrote: »
    Sorry, but this article is full of emotional claptrap and has very little substance.

    Just HOW did Apple "go thermonuclear" on Samsung? It looks far more to me like Apple stuck to its strategic view of how to run a profitable niche business concentrating on profits rather than market share which it has done from the beginning.

    As for Samsung's profits, who cares? They've chased every Apple rumour going since they lost the court case and launched loads of products that cost money to do and launched them into markets that did not exist, except in some rumour site's imaginations. Now they've got a bloody nose out of it. Serves them right too.

    The use of the term 'Thermonuclear' is a nod / homage by DED to Steve Jobs' promise to Eric the Schitt after the betrayal of afore mentioned piece of Schitt.

    http://gizmodo.com/5941817/what-really-made-steve-jobs-so-angry-about-google
  • Reply 112 of 315
    geekmeegeekmee Posts: 629member
    Checkmate.
  • Reply 113 of 315
    MacProMacPro Posts: 19,697member
    cnocbui wrote: »
    So none of the big screens prior to the iP6 were good enough?

    :lol:

    Glad you get it. Not good enough to make a profit, yes. lol back at ya! :D

    Technologies include hardware and software. It is pretty evident that Samsung's larger higher end offerings were not 'good enough', or are you going to challenge that statement too? If so please provide links to data showing Samsung's or any other phone maker's financial success in that market segment.

    .... waiting ....
  • Reply 114 of 315
    dasanman69dasanman69 Posts: 13,002member
    danielsw wrote: »

    Wrong. DED is just taking this choice opportunity to use some colorful language in his editorial.

    The fact of the matter is that SUCCESS is the best revenge. Apple is simply resolute as always in its efforts to succeed. No one including Steve really wanted expensive litigation. Apple simply held to its principles and kept producing great products, which was itself the only effective "attack" on Samsung. You can't sue a criminal, as they'll never pay.

    Apple has no intent to "screw Samsung" other than to simply let it screw itself, like any criminal will eventually do.

    Did you not read this paragraph?
    Producing a large screen phone with adequate 64-bit CPU and leading GPU processing power to drive it, and then giving it clearly differentiated features including Touch ID and Apple Pay as well as Continuity features that tie it into the Mac desktop, iPad and the upcoming Apple Watch, were all elements of a plan to strip Samsung of its Galaxy S and Note 4 profit engines.
  • Reply 115 of 315
    MacProMacPro Posts: 19,697member
    sog35 wrote: »
    Are you a true idiot?

    The only reason iOS declined is because people in poor countries are switching from feature phones to smart phones.  That increase in $50 smartphone users does not mean anything to Apple.

    And the numbers you are quoting are total BS anyway.

    The only FACTUAL numbers we can go by is PROFITS.
    Apple will have 75-80% of the profits in 2015.

    Nice to be on the same page again after yesterday's marathon :)
  • Reply 116 of 315
    lkrupplkrupp Posts: 10,557member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by 65C816 View Post

     

    Premise is way off base.  Looking at numbers alone, Apple's last quarter jumped up 6 million units.  Xiaomi's units jumped up 12 million units.  Even if all of Apple's increase were to come at the expense of Samsung, that's only a 6 million unit hit against Samsung.  Xiaomi's phones are comparable to Samsung's high end, but priced as a mid end, which is why they're growing so fast.

     

    It is stupid to discount Xiaomi, and worse yet, it appears that profit isn't their primary goal at this point.




    Ah, the new troll meme is coming forward. Xiaomi is the new Apple killer. I knew the iHater crowd would find a substitute for Samsung. So with Xiaomi Apple is even MORE doomed than before because Xiaomi is not concerned with profit. And of course the old “Android has the largest market share” argument rears its head in other posts here. Interesting how that ilk lumps all OEMs into one single “Android” device entity. 

     

    Expect to hear more about the rise of Xiaomi and the ultimate death of Apple in future posts. It’s all so predictable.

  • Reply 117 of 315
    dasanman69dasanman69 Posts: 13,002member
    The use of the term 'Thermonuclear' is a nod / homage by DED to Steve Jobs' promise to Eric the Schitt after the betrayal of afore mentioned piece of Schitt.

    http://gizmodo.com/5941817/what-really-made-steve-jobs-so-angry-about-google

    The threat was made against Google, not Samsung.
  • Reply 118 of 315
    MacProMacPro Posts: 19,697member
    dasanman69 wrote: »
    It could have also been more deadly. Never count on anyone to make money for you.

    I don't know obviously but I hope ... the more deadly effect over time will be destroying a very good friendship Apple and Google had by trying to repeat Microsoft's model of stealing Apple's OS and sharing it (albeit Gates at least had the brains to charge for Windblows). Life is strange and now we see IBM and Microsoft working quite well with Apple and fences being mended. Oracle is friendly to Apple too. That's a pretty formidable group of companies not trying to destroy each other.
  • Reply 119 of 315
    mcalevy wrote: »
    Just another ho-hum article that fails to mention the world changing CONCEPT of the Ubuntu phone. Whoever develops this concept first is going to be the next Apple. It's hard to believe that there is not a corporation out there that can grasp this. Apple is more than 80% there, the last remaining part is for iOS apps to run on their computers. If Apple started a division to sell economically priced computers and phones, they could own the world. Their failing is to maximize profits, not to sell good products making a reasonable profit. The question Americans cannot grasp is that if your net worth is already $100 million, what the hell is another $100 million going to do for you? Apple has over $150 billion in cash just sitting around. What the hell is another $50 billion going to do for them?

    There is no money out there outside the G-20 for both a smartphone and a computer. These folks are not interested in smaller and faster. They just want and need something they can afford that works. There is the potential out there for a billion sales of a workable ubuntu phone. As Americans, you have no idea, as it is literally impossible for you to walk into a retailer and test drive a computer with linux installed, in spite of the fact that every major manufacture sells computers outside the USA with linux installed. You just cannot find one on their USA website or in a USA store.

    I might also note that 16 of the top 20 laptops sold by amazon are priced at less than $350, with 3 of the other 4 from apple. Apple'so A7 chip was considered desktop class. The A8 is much improved. The cost of these processors is about $20. Intel's best efforts at a mobile processor sells for $280, their server processors more than a grand. Connect the dots.

    The day I can dock my smartphone into a laptop shell is the day I get rid of my Apple products. And so will a lot of schools and corporations.

    No one gives two flips about an Ubuntu phone, fer cryin' out loud.
  • Reply 120 of 315
    Samsung has not paid the billion yet?! When is that bill due? I'm surprised by this...
Sign In or Register to comment.